Source: Sakaino 1928

Sakaino Kōyō 境野黄洋. “Butsu yuikyō gyō to Butsu shogyō san ni tsuite 『仏遺教経』と『仏所行讃』について.” Shisō 思想 79 (1928): 189-204.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

Sakaino states that he regards the Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra 大般泥洹經 T376 as actually by Guṇabhadra.

Edit

191

 Sakaino states that he regards the Mahaparinirvana-mahasutra 大般泥洹經 T376 as actually by Gunabhadra. Gunabhadra 求那跋陀羅 T0376; 佛說大般泥洹經

Sakaino discusses relations among *Dharmakṣema's Buddhacarita 佛所行讚 T192, Baoyun's 佛本行經 T193, and the Yi jiao jing 遺教經 T389 ascribed to Kumārajīva. He notes that the overall order of events, the topics and sequence of the Buddha's deathbed exhortations to his disciples, and much detailed phraseology, overlaps closely between T389 and Ch. 26 of T193. Most of the article is given over to detailed examples of these overlaps. Sakaino also notes that the introductory portion of T389 has a model or parallel in the Faxian/Buddhabhadra translation of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra 大般泥洹經 T376 (which he states he regards as actually by Guṇabhadra) (191). Sakaino considers two possibilities: this phrasing might have been modeled on the earlier wording of "Kumārajīva's" T389; or else this phrasing could have added later to T389 on the basis of T376.

Sakaino also notes (201 ff.) that Baoyun's T192 also overlaps with both T193 and T389 in many of the same details, though he says that T192 is more polished than T193. Sakaino states that T192 and T193 nonetheless still differ from one another too much to be regarded as alternate translations of the same work; rather, they are different works based upon the same source materials. Sakaino concludes that T192 and T193 were based upon the same source text, and T389 is the root text underlying both (i.e. *Buddhacarita is a versification of T389), rather than T389 representing a prose reworking of the *Buddhacarita. He regards T192 as closer to T389 than it is to T193. [Sakaino does not consider the possibility that any of these overlaps indicate that the texts in question were composed, or partly composed, in China; he seems to consider this evidence only for what it indicates about presumed original Indic source texts.]

Edit

 Sakaino discusses relations among *Dharmaksema's Buddhacarita 佛所行讚 T192, Baoyun's 佛本行經 T193, and the Yi jiao jing 遺教經 T389 ascribed to Kumarajiva. He notes that the overall order of events, the topics and sequence of the Buddha's deathbed exhortations to his disciples, and much detailed phraseology, overlaps closely between T389 and Ch. 26 of T193. Most of the article is given over to detailed examples of these overlaps. Sakaino also notes that the introductory portion of T389 has a model or parallel in the Faxian/Buddhabhadra translation of the Mahaparinirvana-mahasutra 大般泥洹經 T376 (which he states he regards as actually by Gunabhadra) (191). Sakaino considers two possibilities: this phrasing might have been modeled on the earlier wording of "Kumarajiva's" T389; or else this phrasing could have added later to T389 on the basis of T376. Sakaino also notes (201 ff.) that Baoyun's T192 also overlaps with both T193 and T389 in many of the same details, though he says that T192 is more polished than T193. Sakaino states that T192 and T193 nonetheless still differ from one another too much to be regarded as alternate translations of the same work; rather, they are different works based upon the same source materials. Sakaino concludes that T192 and T193 were based upon the same source text, and T389 is the root text underlying both (i.e. *Buddhacarita is a versification of T389), rather than T389 representing a prose reworking of the *Buddhacarita. He regards T192 as closer to T389 than it is to T193. [Sakaino does not consider the possibility that any of these overlaps indicate that the texts in question were composed, or partly composed, in China; he seems to consider this evidence only for what it indicates about presumed original Indic source texts.] T0192; 佛所行讚 T0193; 佛本行經 T0389; 佛垂般涅槃略說教誡經